Qana: Exterminating the Ants
Monday July 31st 2006, 8:41 am
In order to understand the racist brutality of the latest Qana massacre, it is instrumental to look at the previous Qana massacre. James Bovard writes: “When you see the photos of corpses of young children being dragged from the Qana rubble, remember: These are not human beings. These are terrorists. And Israel announced ahead of time that, because they were in south Lebanon, they were legitimate targets,” as Haim Ramon made sure to inform us. In his blog entry, Bovard quotes from his book, Terrorism and Tyranny: Trampling Freedom, Justice and Peace to Rid the World of Evil:
On April 18, 1996 the IDF artillery shelled a United Nations compound near Qana that was overflowing with 800 Lebanese civilians “who had fled from their villages on IDF orders.” The barrage killed 102 refugees and wounded hundreds of others. Hezbollah guerillas had fired Katyusha rockets a few hundred yards from the compound. A spokesman for United Nations forces in Lebanon quickly denounced the attack as a “massacre.” Maj. Gen. Dan Harel, the commander of the Israeli offensive, insisted that the shelling of the camp could not possibly have been deliberate because “that thing cannot happen in a democratic country like Israel.” Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres declared that “the sole guilty party, still on the ground, is Hezbollah…. We are dealing here with a horrible, cynical and irresponsible organization. Hezbollah’s grand strategy all along has been to hide behind the backs of civilians.” A United Nations investigation concluded that “it is unlikely that the shelling of the United Nations compound was the result of gross technical and/or procedural errors.” The IDF insisted that it was unaware that the camp was chock full of refugees; the UN report retorted: “Contrary to repeated denials, two Israeli helicopters and a remotely piloted vehicle [drone] were present in the Qana area at the time of the shelling.” An Amnesty International report concluded that the IDF “intentionally attacked the UN compound.” A few weeks after the attack, two of the Israeli gunners involved in the shelling were interviewed by a Jerusalem newsweekly. One of the gunners commented: “In a war, these things happen…. It’s just a bunch of Arabs.” A second gunner said that, after bombarding the refugee camp, a commander told the gunners that “we were shooting well and to continue this way and that Arabs, you know, there are millions of them.” Haaretz columnist Ari Shavit, who had fought at Qana 18 years earlier while serving in the IDF, observed: “An Israeli massacre can be distinguished in most respects from an Arab massacre in that it is not malicious, not carried out on orders from High Above and does not serve any strategic purpose. . . . An Israeli massacre usually occurs after we sanction an unjustifiable degree of violence so that at some point we lose the ability to control that violence. Thus, in most cases, an Israeli massacre is a kind of work accident.”
Note the overt racism here: things happen, it was a work accident, it wasn’t malicious, just a bunch of Arabs, there are millions of them, not to worry. Of course, this racism is never reported in the corporate media, although as of late it has surfaced in the form of articles and editorials, most notably by Noah Feldman and Alan Dershowitz, who argue that civilians, including newborn babies, are responsible for their own slaughter and some civilians are more innocent than others. If you watch Fox News and, to a lesser degree, although not much, CNN and the other corporate alphabet propaganda organizations, you will notice these sinister arguments arising in response to the inexcusable slaughter in Qana and elsewhere. Considering the absolute suffusion of Zionist propaganda and conditioning in the corporate media, this obvious slant in favor of (or making excuses for) Israeli crimes against humanity is quite normal.
We are told, ad nauseam, Israel is a democracy, certainly true if one is Jewish. However, Israel is not a democracy for Israeli Arabs (who “enjoy” citizenship, so long as they don’t mind second class citizen status) and especially not for Palestinian Arabs, who are considered little more than an infestation of cockroaches. In fact, according to a 2003 opinion poll in Israel (Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies), 31% of Jewish Israeli citizens support the expulsion of the Arab minority, and 46% support clearance of the territories, that is to say stolen land. Imagine likewise numbers in America in regard to Blacks or Mexicans or for that matter any racial or ethnic minority. It would be unacceptable. But for Israel this racism is quite natural—and it is glossed over or completely ignored in the corporate media. As Henryk M. Broder observes, in Israel “biology determines fate” and it is not far off the mark to state this mindset extends beyond the borders of Israel—in fact, Israel has no international accepted borders, but this is another issue—as people in neighboring countries of Arab biology are subjected to a harsh and often murderous fate, i.e., they are simply a bunch of Arabs, there are millions of them, same as there are millions of ants.
The last time we heard the “biology determines fate” argument, the Nazis were storming across Europe.
In addition to Israel’s long term desire to steal Lebanese land (at least to the Litani River), the fact the ants of Hezbollah dealt the racist state of Israel a decisive defeat drives not only Israeli leaders but average Israelis bonkers. “Israel never forgot the feeling of humiliation the country—and particularly its military—experienced when a jubilant Hezbollah celebrated the Israeli army’s departure,” writes Claude Salhani for United Press International. “But much as Hezbollah and the Israelis are at the forefront of this conflict, which is not the root cause of hostilities by any length of imagination. The root cause of the conflict was, and remains, the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Solve it and you solve 90 percent of the region’s problems.”
Under current conditions, however, with massive support for the racist Israeli state in the United States—including millions of pretrib Christians—and the unrelenting propaganda campaign dismissing Israeli crimes underway in the corporate media, the “root cause of the conflict” will not be addressed, let alone solved. Imagine the “humiliation” of an actual and honest brokered peace—including the establishment of a Palestinian state—on the part of Israelis, so outraged by the mere fact the Lebanese evicted them from their country after a long and illegal occupation. It will never happen. Instead, we can expect a cataclysmic and possibly nuclear confrontation, including the genocide of all Palestinians and no shortage of others.
No, the only way to solve the problem is to go after Israel where it hurts—in the pocketbook. If the United States cut off the succor—in the form of billions of dollars every single year, every year since the early 1950s—Israel would have no choice but to make peace with its neighbors and the Palestinians. Of course, this is far less than certain—in fact, as this point, a fanciful pipedream–and may instead result in a nuclear reaction, as Israel has more than 400 nuclear bombs and the stated desire to use them against their enemies.
Monday July 31st 2006, 8:41 am
In order to understand the racist brutality of the latest Qana massacre, it is instrumental to look at the previous Qana massacre. James Bovard writes: “When you see the photos of corpses of young children being dragged from the Qana rubble, remember: These are not human beings. These are terrorists. And Israel announced ahead of time that, because they were in south Lebanon, they were legitimate targets,” as Haim Ramon made sure to inform us. In his blog entry, Bovard quotes from his book, Terrorism and Tyranny: Trampling Freedom, Justice and Peace to Rid the World of Evil:
On April 18, 1996 the IDF artillery shelled a United Nations compound near Qana that was overflowing with 800 Lebanese civilians “who had fled from their villages on IDF orders.” The barrage killed 102 refugees and wounded hundreds of others. Hezbollah guerillas had fired Katyusha rockets a few hundred yards from the compound. A spokesman for United Nations forces in Lebanon quickly denounced the attack as a “massacre.” Maj. Gen. Dan Harel, the commander of the Israeli offensive, insisted that the shelling of the camp could not possibly have been deliberate because “that thing cannot happen in a democratic country like Israel.” Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres declared that “the sole guilty party, still on the ground, is Hezbollah…. We are dealing here with a horrible, cynical and irresponsible organization. Hezbollah’s grand strategy all along has been to hide behind the backs of civilians.” A United Nations investigation concluded that “it is unlikely that the shelling of the United Nations compound was the result of gross technical and/or procedural errors.” The IDF insisted that it was unaware that the camp was chock full of refugees; the UN report retorted: “Contrary to repeated denials, two Israeli helicopters and a remotely piloted vehicle [drone] were present in the Qana area at the time of the shelling.” An Amnesty International report concluded that the IDF “intentionally attacked the UN compound.” A few weeks after the attack, two of the Israeli gunners involved in the shelling were interviewed by a Jerusalem newsweekly. One of the gunners commented: “In a war, these things happen…. It’s just a bunch of Arabs.” A second gunner said that, after bombarding the refugee camp, a commander told the gunners that “we were shooting well and to continue this way and that Arabs, you know, there are millions of them.” Haaretz columnist Ari Shavit, who had fought at Qana 18 years earlier while serving in the IDF, observed: “An Israeli massacre can be distinguished in most respects from an Arab massacre in that it is not malicious, not carried out on orders from High Above and does not serve any strategic purpose. . . . An Israeli massacre usually occurs after we sanction an unjustifiable degree of violence so that at some point we lose the ability to control that violence. Thus, in most cases, an Israeli massacre is a kind of work accident.”
Note the overt racism here: things happen, it was a work accident, it wasn’t malicious, just a bunch of Arabs, there are millions of them, not to worry. Of course, this racism is never reported in the corporate media, although as of late it has surfaced in the form of articles and editorials, most notably by Noah Feldman and Alan Dershowitz, who argue that civilians, including newborn babies, are responsible for their own slaughter and some civilians are more innocent than others. If you watch Fox News and, to a lesser degree, although not much, CNN and the other corporate alphabet propaganda organizations, you will notice these sinister arguments arising in response to the inexcusable slaughter in Qana and elsewhere. Considering the absolute suffusion of Zionist propaganda and conditioning in the corporate media, this obvious slant in favor of (or making excuses for) Israeli crimes against humanity is quite normal.
We are told, ad nauseam, Israel is a democracy, certainly true if one is Jewish. However, Israel is not a democracy for Israeli Arabs (who “enjoy” citizenship, so long as they don’t mind second class citizen status) and especially not for Palestinian Arabs, who are considered little more than an infestation of cockroaches. In fact, according to a 2003 opinion poll in Israel (Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies), 31% of Jewish Israeli citizens support the expulsion of the Arab minority, and 46% support clearance of the territories, that is to say stolen land. Imagine likewise numbers in America in regard to Blacks or Mexicans or for that matter any racial or ethnic minority. It would be unacceptable. But for Israel this racism is quite natural—and it is glossed over or completely ignored in the corporate media. As Henryk M. Broder observes, in Israel “biology determines fate” and it is not far off the mark to state this mindset extends beyond the borders of Israel—in fact, Israel has no international accepted borders, but this is another issue—as people in neighboring countries of Arab biology are subjected to a harsh and often murderous fate, i.e., they are simply a bunch of Arabs, there are millions of them, same as there are millions of ants.
The last time we heard the “biology determines fate” argument, the Nazis were storming across Europe.
In addition to Israel’s long term desire to steal Lebanese land (at least to the Litani River), the fact the ants of Hezbollah dealt the racist state of Israel a decisive defeat drives not only Israeli leaders but average Israelis bonkers. “Israel never forgot the feeling of humiliation the country—and particularly its military—experienced when a jubilant Hezbollah celebrated the Israeli army’s departure,” writes Claude Salhani for United Press International. “But much as Hezbollah and the Israelis are at the forefront of this conflict, which is not the root cause of hostilities by any length of imagination. The root cause of the conflict was, and remains, the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Solve it and you solve 90 percent of the region’s problems.”
Under current conditions, however, with massive support for the racist Israeli state in the United States—including millions of pretrib Christians—and the unrelenting propaganda campaign dismissing Israeli crimes underway in the corporate media, the “root cause of the conflict” will not be addressed, let alone solved. Imagine the “humiliation” of an actual and honest brokered peace—including the establishment of a Palestinian state—on the part of Israelis, so outraged by the mere fact the Lebanese evicted them from their country after a long and illegal occupation. It will never happen. Instead, we can expect a cataclysmic and possibly nuclear confrontation, including the genocide of all Palestinians and no shortage of others.
No, the only way to solve the problem is to go after Israel where it hurts—in the pocketbook. If the United States cut off the succor—in the form of billions of dollars every single year, every year since the early 1950s—Israel would have no choice but to make peace with its neighbors and the Palestinians. Of course, this is far less than certain—in fact, as this point, a fanciful pipedream–and may instead result in a nuclear reaction, as Israel has more than 400 nuclear bombs and the stated desire to use them against their enemies.
posted by Tapir's Rants at 9:27 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home